Aug 11, 2021 ¡ There are many more questions clients may have regarding their rights when getting assistance from an attorney. These are just a few that can help make things more clear. If you have any more questions, you may contact our offices to inquire about your legal rights. For a free legal consultation, call 833-552-7274.
Aug 15, 2019 ¡ Fraudulent misrepresentation may be defined as any type of lie or false statement that is used to trick a person into an agreement. The misrepresentation can occur through many ways, including written words, spoken words, gestures or body motions (such as a nod), or through silence or inaction. Fraudulent misrepresentation is frequently raised ...
Not only are you out $1,225, but your car runs worse than it did when you brought it in. After a bit of foot stomping, you get someone to say that they will look over the car. The next day you call the garage. Nothing has been done. You yell at the garage owner and then call your bank to stop payment on the check, but it already has been cashed.
The defense lawyer asked you an off-the-wall question. A question that is so far-fetched that I would be well within my right to tell you not to answer the question. That question also assumes a number of facts. It assumes you beat your wife. It assumes you beat her at night.
For example, if someone says âI think that we should give better study guides to studentsâ, a person using a strawman might reply by saying âI think that your idea is bad, because we shouldn't just give out easy A's to everyoneâ.
An example of a slippery slope argument is the following: legalizing prostitution is undesirable because it would cause more marriages to break up, which would in turn cause the breakdown of the family, which would finally result in the destruction of civilization. Related Topics: fallacy.
This fallacy consists in diverting attention from the real issue by focusing instead on an issue having only a surface relevance to the first. Examples: Son: "Wow, Dad, it's really hard to make a living on my salary." Father: "Consider yourself lucky, son.
When one makes a hasty generalization, he applies a belief to a larger population than he should based on the information that he has. For example, if my brother likes to eat a lot of pizza and French fries, and he is healthy, I can say that pizza and French fries are healthy and don't really make a person fat.
How to respond to slippery slope argumentsPoint out the missing pieces of the slope. ... Highlight the disconnect between the different pieces of the slope. ... Point out the distance between the start and end points of the slope. ... Show that it's possible to stop the transition between the start and end points.More items...
In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected because, with little or no evidence, one insists that it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. The slippery slope involves an acceptance of a succession of events without direct evidence that this course of events will happen.
Examples of Non Sequitur Fallacy Since you are a good person, therefore, I'm a good person.â) or âDenying the Antecedentâ (âIf I'm an adult, then I'm intelligent. I'm not an adult. Therefore, I'm not intelligent.â). They defy the basic rules of reason and are usually based upon unsound arguments.
The terms âfalse dilemmaâ and âfalse dichotomyâ are often used interchangeably. Example: You can either get married or be alone for the rest of your life. False dichotomies are related to false dilemmas because they both prompt listeners to choose between two unrelated options.
2. When you are late getting home-past curfew-you distract your parents by talking to them about the weather-how cold it is, or how rainy it is.
Description: The argument attempts to persuade by provoking irrelevant feelings of sympathy. Examples: "You should not find the defendant guilty of murder, since it would break his poor mother's heart to see him sent to jail."
To avoid hasty generalizations, make sure you provide sufficient and appropriate evidence to support your conclusions. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (Latin for "after this, therefore because of this") asserts that one event caused another because it preceded it.
The is-ought fallacy occurs when the assumption is made that because things are a certain way, they should be that way. It can also consist of the assumption that because something is not now occurring, this means it should not occur.
If you have a witness to oral statements made by the garage , be sure to bring that person with you to court.
If the garage isn't cooperative, it's time to write a formal demand letter. Your letter should be short, polite, and written with an eye to a judge reading it. Be sure to emphasize any promise made by the garage. Most small independent garages don't make a written warranty or guarantee on their work.
In cases involving machinery, people can give effective testimony by presenting a large drawing illustrating the mistake or problem. This approach is most effective when your expert appears in court and authoritatively points to the drawing to detail the problem. Talk to a Lawyer.
Remember, the judge is probably not a mechanic. It's important to pay attention to the human being to whom you are presenting your case. It's no secret that many, if not most, small claims judges don't understand the insides of cars any better than you do.
You may be a little paranoid about taking your car back to the garage that just screwed it up. Nevertheless, unless they have proven themselves outrageously incompetent, this is probably your best approach because it's usually easier to get work redone than it is to get a big refund.
That means the defense is entitled to learn about you and your injury. They do this through a process called 'discovery'. What a trend-setting name. Discovery allows the defense lawyer to get copies of your medical records.
Medical malpractice law is a fascinating area of law. It is technical. It is highly specialized and requires a great deal of knowledge of medicine as well as a high degree of trial skill. In this lecture, which was designed to teach lawyers who practice in other areas of law, what they need to know about medical malpractice law in New York. Lawyers across the country
That booklet is called a transcript. That's your deposition transcript. In legal circles a deposition is also known as an examination before trial. When you bring a lawsuit, you put your medical condition in issue.
The stenographer is there to record all of the questions you are asked and all of the answers you give. Those questions and answers are transcribed and put into a booklet.
Not true. Every client talks to their attorney. Every client must be prepared for their deposition. The defense lawyer is just fishing for information. He's throwing his line into the water, not knowing what, if anything, he'll catch.
Regardless, the defense lawyer knows he will be unable to get a witness to talk about the conversation you had with your lawyer. He can learn that you had a conversation. That's fine. He will try and imply that something sinister is going on because you talked to your attorney before your deposition.
The defense lawyer must have a good faith basis to ask the question. He can't ask it just for kicks.
Usually the judge asks the defendant a fairly long list of questions to determine whether the plea is knowing and intelligent. For their part, defendants normally follow their attorneys' advice and avoid upsetting the plea bargaining apple cart by quietly answering "yes" to all the judge's questions.
know and understand the rights that they are waiving (giving up) by pleading guilty, including (1) the right to counsel if unrepresented, (2) the right to a jury trial, (3) the right not to incriminate themselves, and (4) the right to confront and cross-examine their accusers.
In federal courts, defendants who want to plead guilty or nolo contendere must testify under oath to facts establishing their guilt. Moreover, before accepting guilty pleas, judges have to be sure that defendants are aware of the rights they are giving up by pleading guilty. For a "knowing and intelligent" guilty plea to be made, defendants have to: 1 admit the conduct made punishable by the law 2 admit and understand the charges against them 3 know the consequences of the plea (both the sentence as it stands and the possible sentences that could be given were the defendant to have a trial), and 4 know and understand the rights that they are waiving (giving up) by pleading guilty, including (1) the right to counsel if unrepresented, (2) the right to a jury trial, (3) the right not to incriminate themselves, and (4) the right to confront and cross-examine their accusers.
Moreover, before accepting guilty pleas, judges have to be sure that defendants are aware of the rights they are giving up by pleading guilty. For a "knowing and intelligent" guilty plea to be made, defendants have to: admit the conduct made punishable by the law. admit and understand the charges against them.
Even if the deal seems fair, judges typically engage defendants in a courtroom "colloquy," or verbal exchange, to make sure that defendants have committed the offenses to which they are pleading guilty. (But see Pleading Guilty While Saying You're Innocent .)
Usually this means determining whether , given the seriousness of the crime and the defendant's criminal record, the sentence seems appropriate in light of other sentences the judge has handed down. There are some other variables that may come into play, however.
Assuming that Deputy Public Defender Cooper and Assistant District Attorney Van Lowe have agreed on the plea bargain in the Reback case from the article on How Plea Bargains are Made, the following might take place in the courtroom:
Your defense attorney failed to fully investigate your case and exculpatory evidence comes to light that a competent attorney would have discovered earlier. Your plea was entered by your attorney without your consent. You were denied a fundamental right such as the right to have an attorney.
A plea to set charges in exchange for not adding other charges. An agreement to reduce the sentence based on the defendantsâs lack of a record or weakness of the evidence. A plea to a set of charges in return for a reduced or alternative sentence in exchange for information or to testify against other defendants.
The plea bargain is an agreement between a criminal defense attorney and the prosecution to resolve a criminal case and ends with a defendant pleading guilty or nolo contendre (no contest) in exchange for a reduced sentence or to a lesser charge. Nolo Contendre.
A plea of nolo contendre is a guilty plea. Its effect is in civil cases where a victim may elect to sue the defendant for civil damages by not allowing the plea in the criminal case to be evidence of an admission of guilt to the underlying charge. About 90% of all criminal cases end in a plea agreement. The ones that do go to trial are usually in ...
An adverse consequence of an Alford plea is that a probation officer and judge may feel that your failure to take full responsibility for your conduct weighs against a lenient sentence. This a matter to be discussed with your defense attorney.
A plea agreement must be approved by the court. In rare situations, a judge will reject an agreement made by a prosecutor and defense attorney requiring a renegotiation of the plea. The Plea Must Be Voluntary.
About 90% of all criminal cases end in a plea agreement. The ones that do go to trial are usually in matters where one side will not accept a plea offer if one is offered and/or the defense believes that the prosecutor cannot prove its case.
Lawyers love clients who sue over "principle," because their cases usually go on longer than those brought solely for economic reasons. If you're a defendant, resist the urge to countersue unless you have a solid case. See a therapist insteadâthey're cheaper than lawyers, and you'll feel a whole lot better. 9.
The Incredible Unpleasantness of Being a Litigant. There's nothing worse than that sinking feeling you get when you are handed a legal document that announces you're being sued. Say hello to lawyers, courtrooms, big bills, sour stomachs, and sleepless nights. Here are things you may not know about being on the receiving end of a lawsuit.
1. You're it. You don't have to "accept" the papers that begin the lawsuit. You just have to be "given" the papers ⌠which can mean that the server announced what the papers were and then presented them to you ⌠even if you throw them on the ground. (p.s. That may earn you a citation for littering!)
Tell the Truth. If your lawyer doubts you in the consultation, or doesn't think you have a case, while that may change over time, getting over an initial disbelief is very hard. You have to prove your case. Your attorney is not your witness. They are your advocate - but you are responsible for coming up with proof.
If you don't pay your lawyer on the day of trial, or however you have agreed to, then while he or she may be obligated by other ethical duties to do his/her best, they won't be motivated by sympathy for you, and it will show in court.
Most people hired attorneys because they don't want to sit in court. Well, truth be told, neither do I. The difference between lawyer and client is that the lawyer expects it to take a long time and understands. The client typically thinks it's unjustified. So, your hard truth is that each case takes time. Be patient.
Credibility is one of the most important things in this world - and most important in a courtroom. If you care enough only to wear sweats to the courthouse, then the judge will see that you don't care, and that will be reflected in their desire to help you, listen to you, and decide in your favor. Step it up.
If the judge can see your boobs, he's not listening to your story. If I can see your boobs, then I know you didn't care enough about yourself to talk to an attorney. Dress like you are going to church. Credibility is one of the most important things in this world - and most important in a courtroom.
If no one can confirm that the story is true, you will at least need something external, such as a hard copy document, to prove your case. Be prepared.
While lawyers can certainly take your money and your time and we can file a case that will be very hard to win, if you don't care enough about your life to get a contract, the judge is not very likely to be on your side. At least, not automatically. Oral contracts are extremely hard to prove. What are the terms.
According to the text, the most common charge leveled against prosecutors is: failure to disclose evidence. You are an attorney, and the local court has appointed you to represent a defendant who has been charged with aggravated assault and battery. The prosecutor originally intended to charge attempted murder.
True. A legal tool used to confiscate property and money associated with organized criminal activity is called: asset forfeiture.
Ceballos was a Supreme Court decision which dealt with: the First Amendment rights of public servants. You are a prosecutor preparing a case. The facts of the case support a charge of either capital murder or first- degree murder, but you are not sure how you feel about the morality of the death penalty.
Whiteside, the Supreme Court ruled that a defense attorney. You are an attorney, and the local court has appointed you to represent a defendant who has been charged with aggravated assault and battery. The prosecutor originally intended to charge attempted murder.
The "Model Rules" for lawyers only refer to a lawyer's professional conduct and say nothing about how one must behave in his or her personal affairs. False. The prisoners' rights era of the 1970s gave way to the "due deference" era of today, where courts are more apt to defer to prison officials. True.
In the 1980s, victimization of inmates by correctional officers decreased but was followed by a rise in. violence from racial gangs. You are an inmate at a state prison. The facility does not provide air conditioning in the cells and you find this to be unreasonable, considering the summers have been unusually hot.
If you do decide to appeal the decisions of the family court, the Supreme Court, no less, will very likely uphold and support the malfeasance of the family court because the antics of the lower court personnel mirror those of the Supreme Court. I bet the family court personnel have recognized this and are busy minting.
If an attorney manages to liase many or all all your issues, then you have already lost, especially if they have told you not to talk to the spouse and they have served their purpose by fait accompli. If it comes down to money, you have lost, that is the level of basic understanding marriage has become for males.
In the end, the most important thing is keeping parents and children safe, and maintaining the economic viability of parents. These all involve human and civil rights. What despairs me, is that the judiciary is far too willing to rule in favor of men in appeals, and not take cases of mothers and children.
Like federal scrip, you can create debt by articulating an argument on paper. That is what statutory law is, the creation of debt. On average if the paperwork is not a valid contract it is simply at best a billable script called attorney âwork productâ. know the difference, an attorney is a processor of statutory law.
And your are right, the judges dont know the laws and/or the Florida Statutes, so no one should take for granted that they do. But the reality is,,they dont know them because they dont have to know them, because they just fly by the seat of their pants and there is no one to check them.
The gal did not investigate any of the leads I gave him. The magistrate had a stay for seven months. And the clerk of courts refused to send out the subpoenas. The clerk of courts told my attorneyâs staff they were to short of staff to fax the subpoenas over my attorneyâs office the day before the trial.